Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to talk

about a couple of unrelated topics, except that they both are examples of officials in positions of power overreacting to situations and making very bad decisions as a result.

Mr. Speaker, when I read that a 5-year-old boy in Calvert County, Maryland, had been suspended from school for 10 days simply for showing a toy cap gun to his friend on the school bus, I was shocked and saddened. I became even sadder when I read the little boy was questioned for over 2 hours by school officials before his parents were called, and the boy uncharacteristically wet his pants during this interrogation. His mother said later this boy was all boy and all about rocks, frogs, and cowboys.

This interrogation was ridiculous, and a 10-day suspension was ridiculous overkill. I wondered if these school officials who did this to this little boy had lost their common sense and human decency. I am now pleased that the situation has been partially rectified by cutting the 10-day suspension back to the 3 days he has already served, and I hope the parents' request to remove the incident from the boy's school records are granted.

Rigid one-size-fits-all solutions almost never work and frequently lead to very bad, very unfair solutions. I hope that school boards all across this country will at least come to their senses and do away with so-called ``zero tolerance policies,'' especially when it comes to very small children, and especially 5-year-old boys who simply want to be boys.

A second topic that I wanted to mention today, Mr. Speaker, is about the Dodd-Frank law. The Dodd-Frank law has produced many thousands of pages of rules, regulations, and red tape in a misguided attempt to rein in abuses by some of the Nation's biggest banks; however, as is the case with most Federal regulations, this law ended up hurting the smallest banks in this Nation and, thus, helping the big banks to get even bigger.

Listen to these words from a columnist from the Washington Times:

It's been 3 years since the Senate passed the Dodd-Frank

financial reform legislation.

So far, the effects are not what Washington promised. More

than 200 smaller banks have failed in the wake of Dodd-Frank.

Does it comfort them that politicians proclaim smaller

banks were exempt from the market distortions lawmakers

created?

Since community banks are being forced to stay below the

asset threshold forced on them by Dodd-Frank, they are

lending less and making less.

This further strains banks and limits job growth.

We have learned once again that whenever Washington

announces new regulations, hold on to your wallet.

Increasing Federal regulations, Mr. Speaker, always end up helping extremely Big Business, but makes it even harder for our smallest businesses to survive. We have this Big Government, Big Business duopoly in this Nation, and I hope those who continue to vote for bigger and bigger government realize that all they're really helping are the extremely big giants in any industry and they're hurting the small- and medium-sized businesses. I hope that this trend will at least slow down so we don't run more small- and medium-sized businesses out of existence in this Nation.

Now, finally, as I hadn't intended to say anything, Mr. Speaker, but my friend, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), spoke about the very unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He was 100 percent correct. I admire his courage in speaking out in the way that he has done.

Unfortunately, the Armed Services Committee is about to produce a bill that continues this war funding at the rate of $85 billion for the war in Afghanistan just to continue in other overseas situations like in Iraq where we happen to have had the most deadly month in May that we've had in several years.

The situations are not getting better, and this country will be far better off when we start putting our own people and our own country first and stop trying to be the policemen for the world and start doing things that need to be done in this country.

Mr. Speaker, some people and companies are getting rich off Medicare.

Washington Post columnist Charles Lane wrote about power wheelchair suppliers who are reimbursed as much as $5,000 for a basic chair that costs them $700 and sells at ordinary retail for $2,500.

In addition, hospitals are charging wildly varying prices for the same procedures. George Washington University Hospital averages $115,000 for a patient on a ventilator while Providence Hospital in the same city averages $53,000 for the same service. In St. Augustine, Florida, one hospital typically billed $40,000 to remove a gallbladder, using minimally invasive surgery, and another hospital in Orange Park, Florida, charged $91,000. In one hospital in Dallas, the average bill for treating ordinary pneumonia was $14,610 while another charged $48,000.

I do not want to see one poor person denied any necessary medical treatment. However, we should not treat Medicare and Medicaid as holy and untouchable and allow many hospitals, medical providers, and suppliers to get filthy rich off government medicine.

Mr. Speaker, I have had the privilege to visit Puerto Rico three times over the years and have enjoyed many visits and meetings with citizens and officials of Puerto Rico when they have come to Washington. I believe that Puerto Rico is a beautiful island, but more importantly it has many wonderful people.

I have been involved in the issue of statehood for Puerto Rico for many years. While I love Puerto Rico and its people, I do not believe any place should become another state unless an overwhelming majority of its citizens support statehood. This is certainly not the case in Puerto Rico at this time. In fact, support for statehood in Puerto Rico has consistently remained at around less than half the population.

I appreciate very much the contributions of Puerto Rico and its citizens to our Country, and I especially admire and respect the service of many Puerto Ricans in the U.S. military.

I hope that the U.S. and Puerto Rico continue to have the closest possible ties. When the economy of Puerto Rico is strong, trade with the U.S. increases creating jobs in both places. What is good for the U.S. is generally also good for Puerto Rico, and vice versa.

I am always willing to consider and occasionally even support the right of the citizens of Puerto Rico to have referenda or plebiscites on the statehood question. It would be foolish and too expensive to have such a vote every year, but certainly I would not object to having such a vote once every few years.

However, my main goal would be to make sure that such a plebiscite be conducted in the fairest way possible. I, and many, many others, felt that the most recent plebiscite was skewed in a way to tilt the election toward statehood.

Now, I am told both the House of Representatives and Senate of Puerto Rico have passed a resolution stating that the plebiscite held on November 6, 2012 portrayed a false majority in favor of statehood and prevented an accurate vote on the option of commonwealth status.

I want to make absolutely sure that any future plebiscite on the question of statehood be conducted in the fairest way possible and certainly not in a way biased toward any particular outcome.

I want to help do everything possible so that everyone can work together to help foster economic growth for those of us in the 50 states, as well as for our friends, the citizens of Puerto Rico.

The Senate and The House of Representatives of Puerto Rico

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation and commend Chairman Camp and Mr. McClintock.

The Full Faith and Credit Act authorizes the Treasury Secretary to make only the principal and interest payments on our national debt if the United States reaches its current national debt limit of more than $16.4 trillion. The legislation also holds harmless Social Security benefits and requires a weekly report from the Treasury Department regarding the interest and principles payments it has made due to our ever-growing national debt.

As almost everyone knows, our national debt is more than $16.4 trillion, a number that is mind boggling and almost unimaginable. Our Federal Government has grown so large that trying to save a nickel for every dollar we spend is difficult.

To put $16.4 trillion in perspective, this equates to more than $111,500 in debt per taxpayer. If you stacked $16.4 trillion in one dollar bills, it would stack to the moon 4 times.

If we fail to get our spending under control, it will not just be our children and grandchildren who will suffer but everyone hoping to retire in five to ten years as well. If we continue on this path, we will soon be printing so much money that pensions will be worth very little.

In fact, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office released a report on February 5th of this year projecting the United States will be making a total of more than $224 billion in interest payments on our national debt. By 2023 it is estimated we will be making $857 billion in interest payments on our national debt, almost quadrupling our yearly interest payment.

This legislation is a thoughtful, creative way to not dig ourselves further into this hole. We cannot continue our reckless spending ways and expect our creditors to continue funding a Nation that borrows money just to make its own interest payments.

Mr. Speaker, recently the Halls Shopper News in my district profiled a long-time friend of mine, Billy Stokes.

Billy is a very patriotic American and someone I really admire and respect. This article is a great tribute to him, and I call it to the attention of my Colleagues and other readers of the Record.

[From the Halls/Fountain City Shopper News, April 22, 2013]

Working-Class Hero

(By Betty Bean)

Billy Stokes was playing quarter tonk with a guy named

Moses when he had a sudden flash of clarity.

A 1970 Rule High School graduate, Billy had gotten a job

tending bar at Sam & Andy's after the University of Tennessee

had invited him to take a quarter off, and somehow that

quarter stretched out into a year and a half as he whiled

away slow afternoons between lunch and happy hour with his

friends.

``It dawned on me that in 18 months, none of us had moved

an inch. So I went back to school and got my degree,'' he

said.

Forty-plus years later, he's a lawyer with a reputation for

being aggressive, competent, thorough, and for winning some

huge settlements. A politically active Republican who doesn't

mind occasionally going off the reservation--like when he

supported Madeline Rogero for mayor in a nonpartisan city

race--he's got a Rule High School baseball cap on one side of

the shelf behind his desk and a Jellico cap on the other

side,

In his desk drawer sits a picture, soon to be framed, of

the tiny shotgun house in Lonsdale where he grew up. He's

also got a picture of the Howard Johnson's where his mother

waited tables and the ET&WNC truck his father drove for a

living.

On another wall there are pictures of him with presidents,

senators and governors, including several from his stints as

state commissioner of employment security and as special

assistant to the governor during the Don Sundquist

administration, including one of him dressed in full Santa

Claua drag sitting on the back of his Harley-Davidson.

``I'm an old school dude. I like to ride motorcycles, go

fishing and am pretty much true to my southern Appalachian

roots. I'm probably a typical Scots-Irish male. Whether you

got money or I got money, we're all even. Doesn't matter who

you are.

``Redneck? That's all right with me, Pretentious is

probably not something anybody calls me--I hope. RINO

(Republican In Name Only)? I don't care. Madeline Rogero was

by far the best candidate in that field of three. A chief

executive needs to be a competent manager.''

Growing up

His family originally came from Saxton, Ky., just across

the state line from Jellico, before they moved to Knoxville.

His mother, Thelma, is 89 and still living independently. His

father, J.P., died in 1999 and was a truck driver for a

company called East Tennessee/Western North Carolina--ET-WNC.

``We called it `Eat Taters and Wear No Clothes'.''

When he was little, he spent weekends in Jellico with his

grandparents while his mother waited tables in the D&M, which

formally stood for Davenport and Miller, but was popularly

called the Devil's Mansion. He's the youngest of three

children, and Stokes says his family was faring much better

financially by the time he hit adolescence.

``Jimmy Hoffa negotiated a national contract for the

Teamsters, and I was the only kid at home, so I had it a lot

easier than my brother and sister. I grew up working-class

and that's what we need more of today.''

So how did this son of a Teamster become a Republican?

``You'll have to remember--Hoffa didn't have much use for

the Kennedys. A lot of Teamsters were Republicans at that

time.''

After he finished up at Rule, Stokes enrolled in Maryville

College to play football, but injured his ``good'' shoulder.

He'd already had surgery on his left shoulder after his

senior season.

That forced a decision:

``Being short and slow, I decided to quit football and go

to UT.''

Becoming a cop

After his Sam & Andy's epiphany, he went back to school

full-time, supporting himself by working at the General

Products warehouse. He graduated in 1975 with a major in

psychology and minors in political science and sociology, and

started thinking about what to do next.

Like so many Lonsdale boys before him, he became a cop.

Theondrad ``Sarge'' Jackson, a retired sergeant from both

the U.S. Army and the Knoxville Police Department and

proprietor of Sarge's BBQ on Texas Avenue (famous for its

C'mon Back Smoke) helped him get hired under a federal

program at KPD. He was there for less than two years when the

new safety director decided to eliminate the program.

``I got laid off in June of '76 and started law school in

September of '76. That's when I met Richard Bean.''

He counts the director of the Richard Bean Juvenile

Detention Center as one of the three most influential men in

his life, along with his father and longtime Republican

political boss Loy Smith. Two old police officers--Rass

Scruggs and Calvin Housewright, recommended that Bean hire

Stokes while he was in law school.

``I benefitted from the good ol' boy system. I worked 3-11

and Juvenile Judge Richard Douglass gave me the key to his

office with his law library and I'd sneak over to the court

side to study. During finals, Richard would go home and eat

supper and then come in and work for me while I'd go sit in

the judge's office and study. We were on the quarter system,

so we'd go through this every two or three months, and

Richard would take care of me because he wanted me to get

through law school. We were kindred spirits. I brag about

working full-time through law school, but if Richard hadn't

helped me, I never could have done it.''

Stokes got his law degree in 1979 and joined the Army JAG

Corps, where he served three years.

Another thing Bean did for him was to introduce him to Bay

Crawford, a schoolteacher from Roanoke who worked at

Shannondale Elementary School. They've been married for 33

years, have two daughters, three granddaughters and a

grandson on the way. They are also active members of Second

Presbyterian Church.

Entering politics

Stokes came back home in 1982 and went to work for Bond,

Carpenter and O'Connor, and became president of the 5th

District Republican Club (at Bean's urging). In 1984, Bean

and Loy Smith urged Stokes to run for county GOP chair. He

served nearly four years.

``It required me to be a lot more partisan than I normally

am. I'm an old school conservative and I believe that

compromise is not only possible but beneficial. Howard Baker

and Bob Dole are my heroes.''

He has good memories of his two years with Sundquist,

particularly of working with leaders of both parties on the

1996 Workers Compensation Act, and of taking on the state's

tire recycling program. His favorite memory is the time he

spent as Tennessee's point person on the Ocoee Olympic events

at a time when the Atlanta Olympics committee was considering

pulling the plug on kayaking and canoeing.

He returned to Knoxville in 1997, and two things happened

that altered his world:

Loy Smith died suddenly, and Stokes' law partner, Daryl

Fansler, a Democrat, ran for chancellor. Stokes supported

Fansler, upsetting many Republicans.

After Fansler departed for the bench, Stokes put together

the highly successful firm that has become Stokes, Williams,

Sharp & Davies.

In 2004, he took on something that he calls ``a serious

miscalculation,'' running against state Rep. Jamie Hagood for

state Senate and losing badly.

``I'd suffered a pretty serious injury the year before in a

fall-down, and I decided that life is short and you better

grab it fast. I had some people encouraging me, and a lot of

great help and I'd always wanted to serve in that capacity.

``But I ran an inept campaign. I wish I hadn't gotten beat

quite so badly and I let a lot of good people down, but

otherwise I've moved on.''

And then he grinned:

``Tim Hutchison got beat worse.''

Mr. Speaker, the Taiwan Relations Act, signed into law more than 34 years ago on April 10, 1979 by President Jimmy Carter, officially recognizes the unique relationship between Taiwan and the United States.

Taiwan acknowledges and represents the many liberties and freedoms the United States holds dear, and is a dependable ally and friend in the Western Pacific.

Our countries share a strategic partnership. The United States should continue to support the ideals of Democracy and strengthen our relationship with Taiwan, a reliable partner in a very strategic part of the world.

Mr. Speaker, with the emerging debate on drones and their use, I recently had lunch here in Washington, DC with Harrison Akins, a former constituent of mine, to discuss the subject. He is a fine young man who grew up in Blount County in East Tennessee, and I have known him for many years.

He is now a research fellow at American University working as the chief researcher on a book project with Ambassador Akbar Ahmed, the Chair of Islamic Studies at American University, the first Distinguished Chair of Middle East Studies at the U.S. Naval Academy, and the former Political Agent in charge of Waziristan in the Tribal Areas of Pakistan. Ambassador Ahmed's new book is called The Thistle and the Drone.

This book examines the tribal societies targeted by America's drone campaigns in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia, as well as other tribal societies involved in the war on terror.

As I wrote in my August 2012 newsletter, Georgie Anne Geyer is one of this Nation's most senior and most highly-respected foreign policy columnists. She wrote recently that we ``are embarked upon missions mired in the fog of human nature, with robotic weapons that may relieve the threat to our human soldiers but that will cause many times more hatred toward America.''

She wrote about inaccurate drones ``killing totally innocent people'' in several countries and quoted a Washington Post article that said ``an escalating campaign of U.S. drone strikes is stirring increasing sympathy for al-Quaeda-linked militants and driving tribesmen to join a network linked to terrorist plots against the United States.'' Of course, a large amount of money is being made off the sale of those drones to the government.

Mr. Speaker, we should heed the words of Benjamin Franklin: ``Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.''

Harrison Akins is an extremely intelligent, capable young man who I believe will be a great leader for this Nation in the years ahead.

His outstanding research on this book is a significant contribution in an area that deserves very serious and thoughtful consideration.

The Thistle and the Drone gives us all pause to think about the future of drone warfare and the war on terror and the direction of our country, and I call it to the attention of my colleagues and other readers of the Record.

Mr. Speaker, Mayor Bloomberg says, ``Spare me!''

He said yesterday that the Administration's efforts to scare people about the sequester have gone too far.

He said, ``In all fairness, on Monday, we'll be able to police the streets.''

He said ``there's a lot of posturing'' and that statements about laying off employees, closing down hospitals, and letting prisoners go ``are not good for the country.''

The Mayor said, ``Spare me, I live in that world. I mean come on, let's get serious here.''

In today's National Journal Daily, Steve Bell, senior director of the Bipartisan Policy Center, says the sequester is ``absolutely over- hyped.''

He says, ``A sequester will occur and the next day the likelihood is that almost no one will know that it started.''

The choice is simple. We can cut now or crash in the very near future.

The press says the sequester will hurt the economy. Actually, the sequester is miniscule in comparison to the harm to our economy from the President's tax hikes, Obamacare, and environmental overkill.

Mr. Speaker, before I speak about the sequester, I want to salute my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) for his earlier remarks about Afghanistan. I agree with him that we need to stop trying to rebuild the world and start putting our own country and our own people first once again. We have spent several trillion dollars over the past decade on very unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we should have brought our troops home many years ago.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak about the sequester. WMAL radio reported this morning that the administration had put out in a list of cuts which the sequestration would require that the National Drug Intelligence Center in Pennsylvania would be cut by $2 million. The only problem is that this center no longer even exists. It was closed in June of last year.

The scare tactics about the sequester seem to grow more ridiculous, more exaggerated every day. The Washington Examiner wrote, in its lead editorial yesterday, that:

It is known as the Washington Monument Strategy. Turf-

protecting government executives and bureaucrats go out of

their way to make spending cuts as painful as possible for as

many people as possible. By applying any cuts to the very

things the public benefits from most, bureaucratic infighters

believe they can convince the public that every penny that

goes into government is necessary.

In other words, the administration has apparently told all the Departments and Agencies to say that their most popular programs will be drastically cut, instead of reducing spending on their least popular, least necessary, most wasteful programs.

The sequester has already been reduced from $109 billion to $85 billion. This sequester is a cut of slightly over 2 percent from our almost $4 trillion budget. Many people seem to have already forgotten that the fiscal cliff deal raised taxes by $620 billion over the next 10 years on upper-income people. Then there is also the $93 billion in higher payroll taxes on all workers this year. That hike is already in effect. Then there are the taxes already coming in to pay for ObamaCare.

Columnist Mark Tapscott wrote yesterday:

The sequestration scares are the ultimate example of

Washington wink-wink. Politicos from both parties warn of

imminent disaster if the Federal budget is ``cut,'' even

though they know government spending will be higher in 2013

even if the sequestration ``cuts'' are implemented. Put

another way, the sequestration scares are lies, pure and

simple. Not just bunk, not just distortions or misstatements,

but lies. And every professional politician in town--

Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Socialist, Independent--

knows it.

Our national debt is now at a mind-boggling $16.5 trillion. It will go to over $25 trillion in the next 10 years under optimistic scenarios. The Congressional Budget Office a few days ago put out a report that said the interest on our national debt--just the interest-- was going to go from $224 billion this fiscal year to an astounding $857 billion in 10 years. If we allow that to happen, Mr. Speaker, we will then not be able to pay for anything other than Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the debt.

The sequester we are talking about now is minuscule when compared to our present debt and our future pension liabilities. Our choice is simple: we can cut now or crash in the very near future.

Mr. Speaker, one thing that President Obama mentioned in his State of the Union speech the other night, which I hope he follows up on, is his effort to stop the cost of college tuition and fees from going up at such a rapid rate.

I spoke to a class at the University of Tennessee last week--and I've done that many times--and whenever I speak to classes, it shocks the students when I tell them that in my first year at the University of Tennessee it cost $90 per quarter in our tuition. In other words, I went to school for $270. It went up to $105, and then $120, and then $135 a quarter my senior year, so it went up $405. But this was shortly after the Federal student loan program had come in.

Until that program came in, college tuition and fees went up at just the rate of inflation. It went up very slowly--in fact, sometimes less than inflation. But now, and ever since that program has come in, tuition and fees have gone up at three or four or five times the rate of inflation, so that today colleges and universities cost 300, 400, and 500 percent higher than they would have if we had just left things alone. Anything the Federal Government subsidizes, the costs just explode.

When I went to the University of Tennessee--my senior year in high school I had been a bag boy at the A&P making $1.10 an hour--I got a big raise. As a freshman at the university, I became a salesman at Sears and worked there my first 2 years, and I made $1.25 an hour.

Almost everybody who needed to could work part-time and pay all of their expenses and fees in college. Nobody had to borrow money to go to colleges or universities; nobody got out of school with a debt. Then the Federal Government decided to help. And now, what it has resulted in is almost everybody has to borrow money to pay their tuition and fees, and almost everybody gets out of school with some kind of huge debt.

We've seen the same thing happen in medical care. The Federal Government decided to help out. Before the Federal Government got involved in medical care, medical care was cheap and affordable to almost everybody. Doctors even made house calls. We took what was a very minor problem for a very few people and now we've turned it into a massive, major problem for everyone. That seems to be the history of the Federal Government.

I just came from a hearing in the Oversight and the Government Reform Committee, and I will return to that shortly. But in the GAO report on the New York Medicaid program--which is the largest in the country--it tells about a daily payment method resulting in a $5,000 daily rate for institutional residents in the State of New York--$5,000 daily payments. The New York program is paying over twice as much as the average around the country.

We sometimes hear that Medicare and Medicaid can't be cut. We certainly don't want to hurt any lower-income people, but there are some people and companies getting ridiculously, fabulously wealthy off of Medicare and Medicaid. And almost every government program ends up being some sort

of a sweetheart, insider-type deal, giving contracts to companies who hire former Federal employees. It's just scandalous what is going on in this country and it's really hurting this Nation badly--and especially hurting the middle income people that the President says he's so eager to help, but who he will be hurting worse than ever if he keeps expanding the Federal Government at the rate that he wants to.

Mr. Speaker, no Republican in Congress is trying to protect millionaires or billionaires. In fact, Republicans lose most of the wealthiest counties and neighborhoods by very large margins. Much of the impasse in the current negotiations is over who is going to spend the money. Republicans do not want higher taxes simply because so much of what the Federal Government spends is lost to waste, fraud, and abuse.

The most wasteful, inefficient way to spend money is to turn it over to the Federal Government. The best way to create jobs and hold prices steady is to let private citizens spend and invest as they choose. The wealthy do all right even in socialist countries. But lower-income and working people come out much better in countries that allow the most free enterprise. Millionaires and billionaires can take care of themselves. Republicans are simply trying to help create jobs and keep the cost of living from going out of sight for ordinary people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my friend, Ron Paul. I have now served in Congress for 24 years, the last 16 of which I have served with Congressman Paul. During all of that time, I have never once seen him waver or stray from a commitment to liberty and freedom and his promise to uphold and defend our Constitution.

I can assure you that no one runs for office wanting to make people mad. In fact, it may be that people who run for office have a stronger desire to be liked than most people. Thus, I feel certain that at times it has been hurtful to Congressman Paul to be the only Member out of 435 to vote ``no'' on some popular bill or seemingly harmless resolution. Yet, on many occasions, he has been the only vote on some issue. Yet, because of his courage and sincerity and his steadfast belief in free enterprise, private property, and individual freedom, he has earned the respect and admiration of almost everyone with whom he has served on both sides of the aisle.

When there was tremendous pressure, especially on the Republican side, to vote to go to war in Iraq, only six Republicans voted ``no.'' Three of those were very liberal Republicans, and three were very conservative. The three conservative ``no'' votes came from John Hostettler of Indiana, Congressman Paul, and myself.

It is probably accurate to say that, during the 16 years Congressman Paul and I have served together, no two Members have voted more alike than we have. Most of that time we have arrived at our decisions separately and independently. But we also have discussed many votes over the years, and I have attended most of the meetings of the Liberty Caucus Congressman Paul has hosted in his office with a wide variety of speakers.

One national magazine about 4 years ago gave just three Members 100 percent ratings on a freedom index--Congressman Paul, Congressman Jeff Flake of Arizona, and myself. Last year I was very surprised when the National Taxpayers Union ranked me as the most fiscally conservative Member on all 338 spending votes. But the only reason Congressman Paul was not first was because he missed many votes during his run for the White House.

There have been articles and comments and questions about who would be the next Ron Paul in Congress, but, really, no one can replace Ron Paul or fill his shoes or be the next Ron Paul. He has achieved a fame and a following and a position of influence that is almost miraculous considering his unique independence.

He is such a kind, humble, almost bashful person that I know he has been amazed by the numbers that have turned out to support him, and especially the following he has among young people. After all, there is nothing cool or hip about him, but several million college students and 20-somethings love the man. I think his appeal lies in his principled stands on the issues, the concern young people have for their future and where this country is headed, and the fact that Congressman Paul is real. There is nothing fake about him. He believes what he says and says what he believes and then sticks by it even when it is not ``politically correct.''

Financial columnist Charles Goyette probably summed up Congressman Paul's time in office best in a column a few days ago. He wrote:

Politics has ways of bending such lesser men and molding

even the well-intentioned to become servants of the State.

The tools are many: Congressional leadership bribes and

bestows its favors from plum committee assignments to nicer

Capitol offices. The parties reward the lockstep marchers,

too. For those who stay in step, there are endorsements and

campaign funds. Meanwhile, for those who march to a different

drummer--well. And then there is the simple social pressure

to which men whose eyes are not focused on a polestar of

principle soon succumb. The description you've heard of

Washington that you have to go along to get along is all too

true.

Mr. Goyette concluded by writing:

Ron Paul never succumbed. He never sold out for a better

assignment, a nicer office, lobbyist largesse, or shallow

conviviality.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I think words written in a 1930 novel called ``The Lion's Den'' fit Congressman Ron Paul. The words described a fictional Congressman named Zimmer. The author, Janet Fairbank, wrote:

No matter how the espousal of a lost cause might hurt his

prestige in the House, Zimmer had never hesitated to identify

himself with it if it seemed to him to be right. He knew only

two ways; the right one and the wrong, and if he sometimes

made a mistake, it was never one of honor. He voted as he

believed he should, and although sometimes his voice was

raised alone on one side of the question, it was never

stilled.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall vote No. 593 (the Waxman of California Amendment No. 3 to H.R. 3409), I voted ``yea'' when I meant to vote ``nay.''

Mr. Speaker, Americans do not want, forever, permanent wars that last three or four times longer than World War II. And they especially do not want to spend hundreds of billions on people who hate or don't at least appreciate what we've done for them.

Probably half the spending we have done over the years in Iraq and Afghanistan has been pure foreign aid. And we have poured many, many billions into Egypt, Pakistan, and other countries throughout the Middle East.

Our own Nation is $16 trillion in debt. We are borrowing all this money to send to countries that are exploding with anti-American rage.

Fifty-one American soldiers have been murdered over the past several months by Afghan police and soldiers who they were training. Now we have had our Ambassador and three other Americans killed in Libya.

We should have gotten out of Afghanistan years ago. We need to get out now and not take too long to do it.

We need to stop trying to run the whole world, creating so much resentment, and start putting our own country first once again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to take this opportunity to recognize Jennifer Joy Pinniger on the occasion of her retirement as President and CEO of the National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association (NSSGA). Ever since Joy joined the National Stone Association sixteen years ago, she has been an advocate of the 107,800 men and women in the aggregates industry workforce.

She has focused NSSGA's advocacy on those issues with the most potential impact on the industry, always aware that the most effective advocates are those members of NSSGA who work every day to produce the construction materials essential to the built environment.

She has dedicated herself to educating Members of Congress and the public alike about the importance of the aggregates--or the stone, sand and gravel industry--not only to the Country as a whole, but to our individual lives.

About 10 tons of aggregates per person are used annually in America-- everything from glass to cleaning products to pharmaceuticals, toothpaste , and so much more. Every mile of interstate contains 38,000 tons of aggregates and about 400 tons of aggregates are used in construction of the average home.

Joy led NSSGA's advocacy for the successful passage of the last two surface transportation authorization bills--SAFETEA-LU and MAP-21.

She worked closely with coalition partners in the Transportation Construction Coalition and the Americans for Transportation Mobility. She realized early on that involvement of the public--those affected by the need to get to and

from jobs on a daily basis, to take parents to the doctor, to attend children's soccer games; in reality all of us--was critical to success in moving surface transportation legislation forward. Joy worked tirelessly facilitating NSSGA member contacts with community leaders and lawmakers to build momentum for this often overlooked national priority.

Her leadership extended well beyond transportation to those regulatory issues affecting the aggregates industry. She championed the industry in meetings with administrative regulatory agencies, always intent on finding solutions that were right for both the aggregates industry and America. Most importantly, Joy always emphasized the industry's ethics and credibility through NSSGA member company commitments to safety and health resulting in 11 years of record- breaking achievements.

Joy's policy, management and motivational strength has helped NSSGA members reinforce message and guide relation bridges to fend off unjustified regulations like tightened standards for ``farm dust,'' and legislation that does not accurately distinguish aggregates operations from others.

I salute Joy Pinniger on her tenure at the National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association which she led with distinction and integrity. I congratulate her on her retirement and wish her the very best in the years ahead.